Ap Us Government: Court Cases

Front 1

Incorporation

Front 2

Barron v. Baltimore (1833)

Back 2

Held that the Bill of Rights restrained only the national governemnt, not the states and cities

Front 3

Gitlow v. New York (1925)

Back 3

Held that freedoms of press and speech are "fundamental personal rights and liberties protected by the due process clause of 14th Amendment from impairment by the states" as well as federal governemnt (began development of incorporation doctrine

Front 4

Religion

Front 5

Lemon v. Kurtzman (1971)

Back 5

established that aid to church-related schools must (1) have a secular legislative purpose (2) have a primary effect that neither advances nor inhibits religion, and (3) not foster excessive government entanglemenrt with religion (Lemon Test)

Front 6

Engel v. Vitale (1962)

Back 6

held that state officials violated the First Amendment when they wrote a prayer to be recited by the New York's schoolchildren

Front 7

Zelman v. Simmons-Harris (2002)

Back 7

upheld a state program providing families with vouchers that could be used to pay for tuition at religious schools

Front 8

School District of Abington Township, PA v. Schempp (1963)

Back 8

held that a Pennsylvania law requiring Bible reading in schools violated the establishment clause of the First Amendment

Front 9

Employment Division v. Smith (1988)

Back 9

upheld the state of Oregon's prosecution of persons using the drug peyote as part of their religious rituals (constitutional as long as it doesn’t single out one religion)

Front 10

Church of Lukimi Babalu Aye, Inc. v. Hialeah (1993)

Back 10

overturned the Hialeah ordinances that prohibited the use of animal sacrifice in religious ritual, SC found no compelling state interest that justifed the abridgement of the freedom of religion

Front 11

Prior Restraint

Front 12

Near v. Minnesota (1931)

Back 12

protects newparers from prior restraint

Front 13

Speech

Front 14

Schenck v. United States (1919)

Back 14

upheld the conviction of a socialist who arged young me to resist the draft during WWI. SC declared that government can limit speech if the speech provokes a "clear and present danger" of substantive evils.

Front 15

New York Times v. U.S. (1971)

Back 15

agreed that the "no prior restraint" rule prohibited prosecution before the papers were published.

Front 16

Miller v. California (1973)

Back 16

avoided defining obscenity by holding that community standards be used to determine whether material is obscene in terms of appealing to a "purient interest" and being "patently offensive" and lacking in value

Front 17

Texas v. Johnson (1989)

Back 17

struck down a law banning the burning of the American flag on the grounds that such action was symbolic speech protected by the First Amendment

Front 18

New York Times v. Sullivan (1964)

Back 18

established the guidelines for determining whether public officials and other public figures could win damage suits for libel. To do so, individuals must prove that the defamatory statememnts were made with "actual malice" and reckless disregard for the truth

Front 19

Association

Front 20

NAACP v. Alabama (1958)

Back 20

protected the right to assemble peacebly in this 1958 case when it decided the NAACP did not have to reveal its menvership list and this subkect its menberes to harassment

Front 21

Bear Arms

Front 22

District of Columbia v. Heller (2008)

Back 22

held that the Second Amendment protects an individual right to pessess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that arm for traditionally lawful pruposes, such as self-defence within the home

Front 23

McDonald v. Chicago (2010)

Back 23

extended the Second Amendment's limits on restricting an idividual's right to bear arms to state and local gun control laws

Front 24

Rights of Accussed

Front 25

Mapp v. Ohio (1961)

Back 25

ruled that the Fourth Amendment's protection against unreasonable seaches and seizures must be extended to the states

Front 26

Miranda v. Arizona (1966)

Back 26

sets guidelines for polic questioning of accused persons to protect them agaisnt self-incrimination and to pretect their right to counsel

Front 27

Gideon v. Wainwright (1963)

Back 27

held that anyone accused of a felony where imprisonment may be imposed, however poor he or she might be, has a right to a lawyer

Front 28

Argerisinger v. Hamlin (1972)

Back 28

held that whenever imprisonment could be imposed, a lawyer must be provided for the accused

Front 29

War on Terrorism

Front 30

Hamdan v. Rumsfeld (2006)

Back 30

found that detainees eld both in the United States and at navla base at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, had the right to challenge their detention before a judge or other netral decision maker

Front 31

Boumediene, et al v. Bush (2008)

Back 31

held that foreign rettorism suspects held at Guantanamo bay have constitutional rights to challenge their detention in U.S. Courts

Front 32

Cruel and Unusual Punishment

Front 33

Furman v. Georgia (1972)

Back 33

overturned Georgia's death penatly law because the state imposed the penalty in a "freakish" and "random" manner.

Front 34

Gregg v. Georgia (1974)

Back 34

upheld the capitol punishment, concluding that it was "an expression of society's outrage at particularly ofensive conduct….Is is an extreme sanction, suitable to the most extreme of crimes."

Front 35

McCleskey v. Kemp (1987)

Back 35

upheld the constitutionality of the death penalty against charges that It violated the Fourteenth Amendment because minority defendants were more likelt to receive the death penalty that were white defendants

Front 36

Atkins v. Virginia (2002)

Back 36

constraints on the application of the death penalty, and barring execution of mentally retarded persons

Front 37

Roper v. Simmons (2005)

Back 37

constraints on the application of the death penalty, and barring execution of those under 18 when the commited the crimes

Front 38

Privacy/Abortion

Front 39

Griswold v. Connecticut (1965)

Back 39

decided that various portion of the Bill of Rights case "penumbras" (shadows)--unstated liberties implie by the explicilty stated rights--protecting a tight to privacy, including a right ot family planning between husband and wife

Front 40

Roe v. Wade (1973)

Back 40

held that a state ban on all abortions was unconstitutional. Forbaded state control over abortions during the first trimester of pregnancy, permitted states to limit abortions to protect the mother's health in the second trimester, and permitted states to ban abortion during the third trimester

Front 41

Webster v. Reproductive Health Services (1989)

Back 41

upheld the prohibition of the use of state funds or state employees to perform abortions

Front 42

Planned Parenthood v. Casey (1992)

Back 42

loosened its standard for evaluating restrictions on abortion from one of "strict scrutiny" of any restraints on a "fundamental right" to one of "undue burden" that permits considerably more regulation

Front 43

Gonzales v. Carhart (2007)

Back 43

upheld partial birth abortion law, providing an exception to the ban in roder to save the life of the mother, finding it specific and did not subject women to significant health risks

Front 44

Civil Rights/African Americans

Front 45

Dred Scott v. Sandford (1857)

Back 45

ruled that a slave who had escaped to a free state enjoyed no rights as a citizen and that Congress had no authority to ban slavery in the territories

Front 46

Plessy v. Ferguson (1896)

Back 46

provided a constitutional justification for sgreagation by ruling that a Louisiana law requiring "equal but separate accomodations for the white and colored races" was constitutional

Front 47

Brown v. Board of Education (1954)

Back 47

held that school segregation was inherently unconstitutional because it violated the Fourteenth Amendment's gurantee of equal protection. This case marked the end of legal segregation in the United States

Front 48

Swann v. Charlotte-Mecklenberg County Schools (1971)

Back 48

upheld the busing of students to achieve racially balanced schools

Front 49

Guinn v U.S. (1915)

Back 49

held that the grandfather clause was blatantly unfair and unconstitutional

Front 50

Harper v. Virginia (1966)

Back 50

voided poll taxes in state elections

Front 51

Shaw v. Reno (1993)

Back 51

decried the creation of distrcts based soley on recial compostion, as well as the district drawers' abandonment of traditional redistricting standards such as compactness and contiguity

Front 52

Civil Rights/Hispanics

Front 53

Hernandez v. Texas (1954)

Back 53

extended protection against discrimination to Hispanics

Front 54

Plyler v. Doe (1982)

Back 54

struck down the law to withhold state funds for educating childeren who had not been legally admitted to the United States as a violation of the Fourteenth Amendment bacause illegal immigrants are still people

Front 55

Civil Rights/Asian Americans

Front 56

Korematsu v. U.S. (1944)

Back 56

upheld as constitutional the internment of more that 100,000 Americans of Japanese descent in encampments during WWII

Front 57

Civil Rights/Women

Front 58

Craig v. Boren (1976)

Back 58

established the "intermediate scrutiny" standard for determining gender discrimination

Front 59

Harris v. Forklift Systems (1993)

Back 59

upheld that sexual harrassment that is so pervasive as to create a hostile or abusive work environemnt is a form of gender discrimination forbidden by the 1964 Civil Rights Act

Front 60

Civil Rights/Gays and Lesbians

Front 61

Lawrence v. Texas (2003)

Back 61

overturned Bowers v. Hardwick when It violated a Texas antisodomy law on the grounds that such laws were unconstitutional intrusions of the right to privacy

Front 62

Civil Rights/Affirmative Action

Front 63

Regents of the University of Californiav. Bakke (1976)

Back 63

held that a state university could weigh race or ethnic background as one element in admissions but could not set aside paces for members of particular racial groups

Front 64

Adarand Constructors v. Pena (1995)

Back 64

held that federal programs that classify people by race, even for an ostensibly benign purpose sucha s expanding opportunities for minorities, cohould be presumed to be unconstitutional

Front 65

Gratz v. Bollinger (2003)

Back 65

struck down the University of Michigan's system of undergraduate admission in which every applicant from an underrepresented racial or ethnic minority group was automatically awarded 20 points of the 100 neede to gurantee admission

Front 66

Grutter v. Bollinger (2003)

Back 66

upheld the Univeristy of Michigan law school's use of race as one of many factor in admission